Slashdot: News for Nerds


Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

World's First Photo

michael posted about 12 years ago | from the say-cheese dept.

Graphics 162

angkor cut-and-pastes "'The image acknowledged as the world's first photograph - taken by a French inventor in 1826 - has passed its first full-scale analysis with flying colors and is now awaiting an airtight case that will keep it safe for centuries to come, scientists said Wednesday.'" See also the first color photography.

cancel ×


Thats a picture of the world.... (0)

HowlinMad (220943) | about 12 years ago | (#3778245)

or was it taken by the world? ;)

Re:Thats a picture of the world.... (-1)

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM (537317) | about 12 years ago | (#3778501)

One day MSNBC is evil for bashing Lunix. The next day MSNBC is praised for showing the first picture. This Lunix thingy is like a soap opera.

I am relieved! (0, Offtopic)

Jucius Maximus (229128) | about 12 years ago | (#3778256)

For once, deliberate linking on slashdot to an image does not lead to goatse.

Re:I am relieved! (-1, Offtopic)

Yr0 (224662) | about 12 years ago | (#3778271)

no, you mean you can't relieve yourself.
here, have a picture [] to help.


Yr0 (224662) | about 12 years ago | (#3778258)

GEt it here!!!!! []

I'm willing to bet 20 francs... (5, Funny)

Anixamander (448308) | about 12 years ago | (#3778259)

that the world's second photo was of a naked woman.

I've lost track of the humber of technologies that were initially driven by porn. BBS's, Video CD's, e-commerce, and of course, the amazing X10 camera.

Re:I'm willing to bet 20 francs... (2, Funny)

MrFredBloggs (529276) | about 12 years ago | (#3778402)

"I've lost track of the humber of technologies that were initially driven by porn."

Tissue paper?

Re:I'm willing to bet 20 francs... (3, Informative)

phaze3000 (204500) | about 12 years ago | (#3778758)

Franc? What's a franc?

I think you mean €20...

Re:I'm willing to bet 20 francs... (1)

Steve Franklin (142698) | about 12 years ago | (#3778929)

More like 4 Euros. Unless you're giving odds?

Re:I'm willing to bet 20 francs... (1)

jfbus (584847) | about 12 years ago | (#3778965)

Or rather 3,05 (1 = 6,55957FF)...

No flying colors in the 1800s (0)

wackybrit (321117) | about 12 years ago | (#3778262)

The image [...] has passed its first full-scale analysis with flying colors

Flying black and white, shurely? Color, nor 'flying' existed in the 1800s.

Re:No flying colors in the 1800s (1)

yatest5 (455123) | about 12 years ago | (#3778278)

Flying black and white, shurely? Color, nor 'flying' existed in the 1800s.

Birds must have had a real tough time of it.

Re:No flying colors in the 1800s (1)

wackybrit (321117) | about 12 years ago | (#3778290)

Flying black and white, shurely? Color, nor 'flying' existed in the 1800s.

Birds must have had a real tough time of it.

Oops, I meant that humans didn't have the ability to fly in the 1800's.

Re:No flying colors in the 1800s (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3779242)

First manned flight=1783 []

Re:No flying colors in the 1800s (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3779109)

No color in the 1800s? No wonder all the pictures are in black and white! Man, when the 1950s came along the shock must have been amazing.

Here's one . . . (2, Funny)

JJ (29711) | about 12 years ago | (#3778267)

where saying "First." really does mean something.

Re:Here's one . . . (2)

satanami69 (209636) | about 12 years ago | (#3778305)

Too bad the picture is of a wide open a-hole.

World's second photo (1, Redundant)

delphi125 (544730) | about 12 years ago | (#3778268)

The image, taken by French inventor Joseph Nicephore Niepce in 1826, depicts a farm building with pear and poplar trees.

The second photo was taken 15 minutes later when his mistress finally finished taking off her many layers of undergarments.

Re:World's second photo (1)

WWWWolf (2428) | about 12 years ago | (#3778544)

Erm... if I remember correctly, the first photo had exposure time of about eight hours.

So, with the technology of the day, that sort of photos may have needed to wait for just a while... =)

Re:World's second photo (2)

delphi125 (544730) | about 12 years ago | (#3778747)

Of course it took 8 hours to 'develop'. 15 minutes to take the second photograph, 5 hours to make love to his mistress (he was French, remember), 15 minutes to go home to his wife, 2 hours to make love to his wife, 10 minutes to develop the second photograph, 10 minutes 'pondering the mysteries of love' in the dark room, and finally 10 more minutes to finish the first photograph.

So actually, the second photograph was first! :)

alan Thicke DEAD. (-1)

Alan_Thicke (553655) | about 12 years ago | (#3778279)

I just heard the sad news on CBC radio. Comedy actor/writer Alan Thicke was found dead in his home this morning. Even if you never liked his work, you can appreciate what he did for 80's television. Truly a Canadian icon. []
He will be missed :(

Show me That Smile (The Growing Pains Theme Song):

Show me that smile again.
Ooh show me that smile.
Don't waste another minute on your crying.
We're nowhere near the end.
We're nowhere near.
The best is ready to begin.

As long as we got each other
We got the world
Sitting right in our hands.
Baby rain or shine;
All the time.
We got each other
Sharing the laughter and love.

inventor info (3, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | about 12 years ago | (#3778282)

A little more info on the inventor here [] and here []

Too bad that... (4, Insightful)

qurob (543434) | about 12 years ago | (#3778283)

The first picture I ever took with my digital camera faded away, due to the ink in my canon inkjet

Do you think in 5 years I'll be able to pull these pictures off my CDR's? Much less to show my grandchildren...

Re:Too bad that... (0)

getter_85 (464748) | about 12 years ago | (#3778331)

beh... stupid printers...

you're much better of just keeping that photo on that CDR.

and the mind goes blank...

Re:Too bad that... (1)

cbcbcb (567490) | about 12 years ago | (#3778440)

Do you think in 5 years I'll be able to pull these pictures off my CDR's? Much less to show my grandchildren...
If you're concernced, it might be sensible to re-archive them to the current standard every 5 years or so.

Re:Too bad that... (1)

carlos_benj (140796) | about 12 years ago | (#3778504)

You might want to check out archival papers and inks (also, the Epson photo printers/inks seem to get higher marks here although there is some debate about fading blues)

Re:Too bad that... (1)

lionchild (581331) | about 12 years ago | (#3778539)

Do you think in 5 years I'll be able to pull these pictures off my CDR's? Much less to show my grandchildren...

That'll depend on if your CD's meet with TCPA compliance in 5 years, now doesn't it? Hmm..that's an even sadder thought than I believed it to be. :-(

Re:Fading photos (was: Too bad that...) (2, Funny)

tomkarlo (15606) | about 12 years ago | (#3778842)

They're a lot more likely to be viewable than color photographs you took 15 years ago. Color prints, especially the first decade or two worth, fade incredibly fast compared to properly processed (i.e. washed until bleach and other chemicals are gone) black and white photos. From what I understand, there are more B&W civil war photos surviving than color photos from the first 5-10 years of those (and I read this a while back, so I assume it's only gotten worse.)

Yes, CDRs do degrade (albeit slowly.) But you can always transfer the information over to new CDRs with no degredation (yay digital tech!)

I'm more concerned about my DV tapes. Will they degrade before I can afford to transfer them to DVDs (at current prices transferring even my small collection would cost me nearly a grand.)

If you really want to preserve your photos for eternity, post them to USENET. Everyone knows the binaries there are just the same photos being posted over and over...

Re:Too bad that... (1)

Steve Franklin (142698) | about 12 years ago | (#3779087)

Konica makes photo inkjet paper that stabilizes the ink beneath the surface of the paper. The only problem is the color range is a little off.

Re:Too bad that... (3, Insightful)

Lumpy (12016) | about 12 years ago | (#3779141)

Yes... yes you will.
Cd rom drives will be available. Hell I still have a bernulli drive and those have been out of date for over 10 years. I can still read a 5.25 inch floppy and I'll bet that I can find someone with a 8 inch floppy drive and a computer that can read it+ write it to a modern format, or at least connect to a linux box via serial port and upload it.

Hell, I know someone that has the dreaded syquest drive.

many many of us still have nasty-old tech lying around, and if you use something that was in widespread acceptance, it makes it super easy to convert (cdrom)

Right now it's easier to find a 9track tape drive than a 8inch floppy drive.. as the 9 track tape was widely used while 8inch floppy was sparsely used for ony a 2 year span before the tech moved to 5.25 inch.

Re:Too bad that... (3, Informative)

gorilla (36491) | about 12 years ago | (#3779298)

You can go older than that. 7 track tapes were introduced in 1952, and obsolete in 1966 with the introduction of the 9 track tape. There are still people with working 7 track drives who can read 7 track [] .

Re:Too bad that... (2)

jridley (9305) | about 12 years ago | (#3779355)

I have an IDE and a SCSI CDROM drive and a SCSI PCI controller and cables, heat-sealed in a plastic bag, in a box in my basement, so that in 20 years, if off-the-shelf computers can't read the CDs anymore, I can still deal with it. I'm betting that I'll still be able to find a machine with a PCI slot or a SCSI or IDE controller. I guess for another $100 or so I could also drop in a USB (or Firewire) to IDE adaptor case to give me more chances.

If you're worried about being able to read a format, spend $100 and take some precautions.

airtight case? (2, Funny)

NASAKnight (588155) | about 12 years ago | (#3778297)

interesting ... the photo gets the same fate as the inventor, or were coffins airtight back then?

Re:airtight case? (1)

carlos_benj (140796) | about 12 years ago | (#3778519)

When I read 'airtight case' I thought of criminal court.

Damn Time Travellers (1)

2names (531755) | about 12 years ago | (#3778318)

I wish all the damn Time Travellers from the future would quit planting crap like this so we can stop wasting scientific effort. "We found the oldest photograph!!" Big Deal. Work on something new and ADD to science fro Chrissake.

Re:Damn Time Travellers (2)

colmore (56499) | about 12 years ago | (#3778592)

Time Travellers from the future?


boy, quit smokin' crackrock, it'll do you no good.

Short on facts (1)

GeckoX (259575) | about 12 years ago | (#3778322)

Unfortunately this article is very short on the facts surrounding the actual technology involved in taking the picture.

I have read about this before, but most of the details aren't coming to me so I won't even try to pass them on and I don't seem to be able to find an article on this at the moment, but I do know that it took a very, _very_ long time to expose it. Can't remember the exact number but it was at least a full day.

Re:Short on facts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3778376)

yeah, it took 8 hours, so the sun appears to be shining from all directions.

Re:Short on facts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3778728)

Check out: (google search:harry ransom center world's first photograph)
here [] for more info.

I wonder... (2, Funny)

Static242 (124804) | about 12 years ago | (#3778324)

... what kind of developer or fixer a pewter plate used?! To bad PhotoFlow is a more recent invention, because that plate REALLY looks like it could have used it!

Re:I wonder... (2)

colmore (56499) | about 12 years ago | (#3778618)

I think the plate is very beautiful. The distortion combined with the extreme grainyness gives in an impressionistic quality, and the diagonals make for a fairly balanced and striking composition. Funny, it would take another 100 years for photography to really become accepted as art, but the first photograph succeeded wonderfully on artistic grounds.

Re:I wonder... (1)

Static242 (124804) | about 12 years ago | (#3779182)

Personally it does not have the contrast I would expect from a good B&W shot. The composition is good but I am not to sure about the "impressionistic" quality you mention. I tried that line in photography class in college a few times but it did not tread water.

Now if I was using a unknown type camera with an equally unknown method of development... well... then I would be a genius ;)

Re:I wonder... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3779017)

There wasn't a developer. The chemical that he used has the tendancy to harden when exposed to light. He washed off the excess, non hardened material to get this image.
There were no fixers then.

Like tracing on the wall from an image through a pinhole.

Also, the plate was set out for the whole day. Because of this, there are a lot of shadows that interfere with the image.

This is really the second photo (3, Funny)

WeeLad (588414) | about 12 years ago | (#3778330)

The first one was destroyed after the photographer realized his thumb was over the aperture.

another stupid Pr0n joke. (First on this story) (1, Redundant)

DanThe1Man (46872) | about 12 years ago | (#3778335)

Am I the only one that thought the first photo would be of Pr0n? I mean, what the hell is the point of spending years constructing an idea to just take a picture of some roof tops?

Re:another stupid Pr0n joke. (First on this story) (1, Offtopic)

DanThe1Man (46872) | about 12 years ago | (#3778368)

by Anixamander on 08:08 AM -- Thursday June 27 2002

Dammit, I shouldn't have spent 12 minutes spell cheicking that line.

Re:another stupid Pr0n joke. (First on this story) (0, Offtopic)

carlos_benj (140796) | about 12 years ago | (#3778439)

I shouldn't have spent 12 minutes spell cheicking that line.

Well, maybe next time... ooops!

Re:another stupid Pr0n joke. (First on this story) (1)

Anonymous Cowtard (573891) | about 12 years ago | (#3778492)

Dammit, I shouldn't have spent 12 minutes spell cheicking that line.

I dunno... maybe you should've. ;-)

Re:another stupid Pr0n joke. (First on this story) (-1)

Yr0 (224662) | about 12 years ago | (#3778427)

yeah, apart from this [] and this
do you actually read the comments before you post danthe1man?

Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said.


sweet! (0, Offtopic)

r00tarded (553054) | about 12 years ago | (#3778341)

first pr0n!

Tourists (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3778353)

The picture was taken by a Japanese tourist...

"Oh, sank you vely much for most honober picka-cha." (bow)

Linux is Dead by pwpbot (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3778354)

So whatever happened to Linux At tech expo open source software is hard to find By John W SchoenMSNBC NEW YORK June 26 Just a few years ago one of the hottest topics at this annual confluence of PC hardware and software makers was the socalled open source alternative to Microsofts industrydominant Windows operating system Soon open source proponents argued PC users would be liberated from the burden of paying for software The Linux operating system and other open source alternatives written by devoted bands of volunteer programmers would be available to anyone for the cost of a download But today Windows is still running on the vast majority of PCs So what happened LINUX HASNT gone away But after attracting widespread attention and generating several moonshot initial public offerings during the tech boom purveyors of Linux software and support have fallen back to earth along with their stocks Earlier this month Red Hat which sells about half of all Linux software reported a loss of 43 million on an 8 percent drop in revenues in the latest quarter as corporate customers continued to squeeze every penny of their computer budgets Ironically those tight budgets have helped fuel adoption of Linux by managers of large corporate technology departments Created by Finish college student Linus Torvalds and continually updated and improved by a loose confederation of programmers who arent paid for their work Linux is available without the steep licensing fees that come with commercially produced software Companies like Red Hat sell upgraded versions and provide technical support but dont charge licensing fees Those continuing upgrades have begun to generate increased interest from costconscious technology managers A recent survey of 800 companies in North America and Western Europe found that some 40 percent said they were either using or testing Linux according to the research firm IDC With some 27 percent of the market Linux is now the second most popular operating system for servers supplanting the decadesold operating system UNIX Microsoft holds the top spot MSNBC is a MicrosoftNBC joint venture Numbers like those have caught the attention of computer hardware makers Last year as the personal computer slogged through the worst sales crash in its history Linux server sales jumped by more than 50 percent to 400 million with IBM leading the pack Linux used to be just a bunch of geeks trying to change the industry said Elizabeth Phillips a HewlettPackard spokesperson Now Linux is becoming more mainstream every day Linux is also shining brightly on the radar screens of software makers like Oracle which is heavily marketing the latest version of its highend corporate enterprise software which generates mainframelike horsepower using clusters of relatively cheap servers running Linux LINUX BOOT CAMP But Linux has hardly made a dent in the desktop and home user markets At PC conventions like this one Microsofts Windows operating system still rules with some 94 percent of the operating system market for desktops and laptop PCs according to IDC Despite its growing popularity among computer professionals its still not completely user friendly Its for geeks said Faber Fedor a New Jerseybased consultant who helps small businesses upgrade to Linux Near the end of a long hallway in the basement of the Jacob Javits Center at a wellattended conference called Linux Boot Camp Fedor walked a roomful of developers and IT managers through the basics and not so basics of converting to the Linux world Until recently interacting with Linux was almost entirely textdriven much like Windows precursor DOS So converting meant learning an arcane vocabulary of computerese to give the PC even the simplest commands But Linux software is getting better and now more closely mimics the Windows world that the vast majority of PC users are accustomed to A Linuxbased opensource email program called Evolution looks pretty much like a standard Windows desktop OpenOffices provide most key features offered by Microsoft Office including a word processor spreadsheet and mail program Fedor says these alternatives offer more than a familiar look and feel We dont get viruses he said Last year viruses cost the business world billions but every one of those was on Windows WOOING THE HOME USER But adopters of Linux still face hurdles living in a Microsoft world High on the list of headaches is incompatibilities with files created with Microsoft products like Word Small software makers like Lindows are trying to help desktop users bridge that divide Still Linux evangelists like Fedor say that as long as new PCs come preloaded with Windows the open source community faces an uphill battle spreading Linux beyond corporate IT departments into the home Linux partisans point to some small victories WalMart recently began selling a house brand PC at rock bottom prices available with Linux for the thriftiest PC buyersThat thrift among home PC buyers though has further hampered the spread of Linux to home desktops Its another reason software developers like Dave Potter of Fountainville Pa prefer writing programs for corporate users He says he doesnt see much point writing Linux applications for individual PC buyers Home users are cheap he said At 4995 youre going to have to sell a whole lot of copies to make it in the market And as Linux proponents continue to try to enlist desktop PC users Microsoft is busy reinventing that desktop With sales of new PCs in their worst slump in decades Microsoft is hoping to reboot Windows sales by leading the charge toward the Tablet PC a sort of PDA on steroids With new technology to recognize and manipulate handwriting and speech Microsoft and its hardware and software partners are hoping to usher in a whole new platform by giving users all the capabilities of ink according to Microsoft Group Vice President Jeff Raikes Microsoft and the rest of the PC industry are hedging their bets by designing several variations of the device from a standalone tablet about the size of a standard piece of paper to a laptop with a display that flips around and folds flat with the screen facing outward The goal is to replace rather than augment existing PCs according to Leland Rockoff a director of Microsofts table PC project We see this as a primary PC he said Theyre not appliances theyre not companions theyre not secondary But Rockoff says the companys strategy with regard to open source software will be the same as it is with Windows XP


What an amazing piece of engineering!!! (0)

Jack Kane (587655) | about 12 years ago | (#3778358)


Re:What an amazing piece of engineering!!! (2)

Lev13than (581686) | about 12 years ago | (#3778502)


Put this in perspective, man. In 170 years, do you think anyone will be discussing your work?

Ultimately (1)

Dilbert_ (17488) | about 12 years ago | (#3778369)

All advancement seems to be driven by people's need for prOn... Or do you really believe people use broadband, huge monitors and whopping big hard drives to download and look at Word documents all day?

Re:Ultimately (-1, Offtopic)

WeeLad (588414) | about 12 years ago | (#3778397)

NEWS FLASH: NASA has reported a breakthru in space travel today. This announcement comes just days after SETI announced it had made contact with big-breasted, nympho aliens

Re:Ultimately (1)

tomkarlo (15606) | about 12 years ago | (#3778899)

I thought that according to Anamaniacs, all cultural progress was intended to impress women.

* War
* Politics
* Business
* The Arts (except Musicals)

Maybe we've turned a corner here...

And hey, some of us have broadband so we can download movies and MP3s all day. Haven't you been listening to the RIAA/MPAA?

I Wonder (1)

idfrsr (560314) | about 12 years ago | (#3778372)

if this is copyrighted.... to the lawyers!

"If you think of all the history of photographs, the development of film and television, they all come from this first image," said senior Getty scientist Dusan Stulik.

Excellent, *tenting fingers*, soon the MPAA will be infringing on my copyright.

"Oh no Mr. Smithers, the MPAA is coming, help me Smithers!"

Re:I Wonder (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3779164)

If Disney had taken it then today's copyrights would last at least 175 years. Although at "life + 70 years" we are almost there.

Under current US law this photo would have entered the public domain in 1901 as Niepce died in 1831. He was 58.

Had Niepce instead been a 20 year old that lived to be 80 the photo could have retained copyright protection until 1957. (Yes, the first photograph would have retained copyright protection during the creation of the automobile, airplane, motion pictures, talking motion pictures, color motion pictures, a couple of world wars. I do feel that that is extreme.)

A thing to note... (5, Interesting)

Qbertino (265505) | about 12 years ago | (#3778384)

As you see, both walls, the one showing left and the right one, are lit by the sun. Also the sky seems somewhat blurry and apears to have something one might call an 'intense twighlight'.
That's because he exposed the "Film" over the entire day in order to actually make a picture, thus tracking every daylight condition and them changing with the path of the sun.
This is indeed an amazing inovative feat. I would have liked to meet this guy.

actually... (1, Funny)

jhampson (580482) | about 12 years ago | (#3778404)

Actually, the photo had been taken 40 years earlier, but Joe had to wait for the first Fotomat to be invented.

The second link (2, Interesting)

rfreynol (169522) | about 12 years ago | (#3778406)

The second link is entirely more interesting than the initial story. The process that this Russian developed for color photographs back in the early 1900's and the fact that we can now view them is increditable.

Beat's the hell out of Ted Turner's colorization of old movies.

Re:The second link (2)

GigsVT (208848) | about 12 years ago | (#3778516)

The link is interesting, but it was already featured on Slashdot months ago, that is why it only got a passing mention.

Re:The second link (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3779315)

In the late 1800s, early 1900s, before color photogrpahy was widely available, people actually did have b/w photos colorized. I've seen some American photos that were sent off to Germany to be colorized. The color scheme for the houses, etc. is all wrong.

what's sad is... (0)

Hitch (1361) | about 12 years ago | (#3778412)

that the first thing that came to my mind when he said "awaiting an airtight case" was "why is it in court?"

outrageous... (4, Insightful)

lfourrier (209630) | about 12 years ago | (#3778415) have a Reuters sig under a photo obviously in the public domain for a long time.

Capitalism is no excuse for the privatisation of the commons. Signing this photo reuters instead of Niepce is clearly stealing.

Re:outrageous... (2)

marcsiry (38594) | about 12 years ago | (#3778796)

The Rueters credit is undoubtedly for the photo, which you are viewing, of the historical artifact, which is the original photo.

It's confusing, but not malicious.

Re:outrageous... (1)

timeOday (582209) | about 12 years ago | (#3779061)

"Honest, teacher, my paper isn't plagiarized. I downloaded it with my own bandwidth and printed it on my own paper."

Re:outrageous... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3779336)

But did Reuters take a photo of the photo, or were they given a photo of the photo (taken by someone else)? I'd bet the latter. Even if not, it's bullshit to claim a © on something that aims to be a reproduction.

First photo? Wild Turin Shroud theories... (4, Interesting)

mccalli (323026) | about 12 years ago | (#3778428)

OK. I'd like to demolish my credibility before starting on this, so...
  • I don't know any references to back up what I'm saying
  • I'm basing the information on a Fortean Time's [] article I read a few years ago

Given the above, I remember reading that one possibility for the Turin Shroud was that it was an early, and I mean early, photograph. Apparently, the Turks had developed a method of photography involving canvas and I -think- silver nitrate (maybe mercury?). This was in use during the 1500s, as far as I recally the article saying.

Now, the photography they were talking about wouldn't bear much resemblence to a camera as we would recognise it. I believe the subject had to be very still, covered in this impregnated cloth and then the light would do the rest.

I realise this is a very sketchy post, but I'm at work right now and really am not able to spend ages chasing down the relevant information. Just chucking this one out for a bit of interest really...


Re:First photo? Wild Turin Shroud theories... (1)

scotfl (312954) | about 12 years ago | (#3778475)

The Shroud of Turin is a 14th century painting, see here. []

This isn't intended as flamebait, honestly.

Re:First photo? Wild Turin Shroud theories... (2)

mccalli (323026) | about 12 years ago | (#3778533)

The Shroud of Turin is a 14th century painting

Could well be. The bit I found interesting about my post was the inference that photography was already being used by the Turks in the 1500s (hmm...14th actually).

Of course, without any sources to hand I don't have a shred of evidence for this...


Re:First photo? Wild Turin Shroud theories... (0, Offtopic)

scotfl (312954) | about 12 years ago | (#3778651)

Which is why your is at 3 and mine is at 1.


Re:First photo? Wild Turin Shroud theories... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3778510)

Moderation Totals: Overrated=1, Total=1.

Quite amused by this. No-one had actually rated it...

Re:First photo? Wild Turin Shroud theories... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3778534)

The Turin shroud is a painting of the middle age.

1- The carbon 14 datings say this around 1988
2- The fact that the colour on the shroud is due to artificial pigments (proved by an american polarised microscope specialist, Walter McCrone) said this even before. (around 1980)
3- The historians said this even before, as the painter actually admitted having done this to the bishop of Troyes.
4- The King' inquirers, the Bishop inquirers and the Pope (Clement VII) inquirers said this first, back in the 14th century when this painting first appeared. (around 1360)

The only common point between the "Shroud" and this photograph is both were "made in France"

Re:First photo? Wild Turin Shroud theories... (0)

SilkBD (533537) | about 12 years ago | (#3778952)

Granted my source is "In Search of" on TLC, I heard a different story.

1- The carbon 14 datings was around the 1500's
2- The color in the shroud was proven to NOT be pigments on the surface

That's all I'll say about that.

Re:First photo? Wild Turin Shroud theories... (1)

warpsmith (139813) | about 12 years ago | (#3779029)

Wrong - it is certainly NOT a painting. The simplest reason is that the pigment on the extremely fine linen showed NO seepage to the underside of the thin fibers, impossible if a liquid is applied. There are many other points of proof.

It is almost certainly a camera obscura image - see this page [] , halfway down, for a description. It may or may not have been Leonardo (the painted version showed up earlier, but is posited in this case to have been redone under commission by Leonardo), but if not, it was done by another extremely capable artist using available painter's chemicals to create the light-sensitive substrate. To the point that the artist would have used his own body, probably there are better ways to spend one's time than standing motionless covered in white paint in the hot Italian sun for hours (a cadaver would do just as well).

Need some strong evidence? A recreated version of the shroud as a photograph that is extremely compelling can be seen halfway down this page [] . It is actually of much higher resolution than the shroud, but was made using the same camera obscura process.

Re:First photo? Wild Turin Shroud theories... (2)

JimPooley (150814) | about 12 years ago | (#3778702)

The people I saw talking about this at a Fortean Times convention some years ago claimed the Shroud was a photograph taken by Leonardo da Vinci...

Re:First photo? Wild Turin Shroud theories... (1)

mccalli (323026) | about 12 years ago | (#3779019)

The people I saw talking about this at a Fortean Times convention some years ago claimed the Shroud was a photograph taken by Leonardo da Vinci...

That's it. That's what I was trying to remember. I seem to remember that da Vinci was influenced by techniques already developed in Turkey.

Oh, and top name by the way. Been a fan of the Brentford Trilogy for ages...


ahhhhh!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3778461)

Do you know why windows will always have more market share? It's cos of beutified names.. '95' 'Xp' "Me"... where as we have un-exited numbers... ???

damn... too stoned... ahhh computer falling!!

Re:ahhhhh!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3779209)

But I like cheese, and the Japanese will only take it from me when they pry it from my cold, dead hamburger!

First Colour Photography... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3778467)

...was by Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorskii. He used three cameras to capture red, green and blue values and combined the output. Online archive here [] - absolutely incredible!

rumors of earlier photographs (3, Interesting)

Alien54 (180860) | about 12 years ago | (#3778491)

for a while there has been the theory that the Shroud of Turin is in fact a primitive photograph created by Renaissance Uber Geek Leonardo Da Vinci, via Camera Obscura and natural chemicals. There are other candidates as well.

See the various links one [] , two [] , three [] .

Grain of salt not provided. This quickly wanders off into the land of wierdos, as there is also a lot of political infighting in the land of psuedo science. The Idea of the Shroud being a hoax is politically loaded.

Re:rumors of earlier photographs (1)

Arsewiper (535175) | about 12 years ago | (#3778637)

The da Vinci as shroud creator idea is utter nonsense. The shroud was recorded as existing a hundred years before da Vinci was born.

Dangers of early photography (4, Interesting)

Randatola (527856) | about 12 years ago | (#3778521)

Many early photographers died of horrible nervous conditions, a result of exposure to toxic chemicals used in Daguerrotype and other early photographic processes. Ambrotype and tintype, introduced in the 1850's, were faster and the chemicals involved were both cheaper and safer.

error and more info about the photo (2, Informative)

Ristretto (79399) | about 12 years ago | (#3778536)

The article at least implies that the photograph has not been on display, which is inaccurate. Until the renovation work, anyone could go into the Harry Ransom Center, on the main campus at the University of Texas, and see the photo. The photograph was kept in a darkened little anteroom which you walked into to see the photo. I've seen it several times and taken visitors to see it as well.

You can get more information [] about the Ransom Center's photographic collections.

Hidden Photos (4, Informative)

boa13 (548222) | about 12 years ago | (#3778546)

There are quite a few more photos available at the Prokudin-Gorskii Exhibition [] than officially linked from the pages of the exhibition. If I'm not mistaken, 111 photos are available, but only 61 are linked. How to reach them is quite trivial and left as an execise for the reader. Hey, you'll even get the chance to have a beautiful picture of Alix Chevallier!

Should be seen in person (5, Informative)

glenmark (446320) | about 12 years ago | (#3778548)

I saw the real thing several years ago in a lobby to one of the upper floors of the Harry Ransom Center here at UT. The picture is tiny, and the image faint, looking for all the world like a scrap of tinfoil with the image only visible from certain angles, manifested as a slight difference in the gloss of the surface. I can't help but wonder what it looked like when it was new.

There were many wonders to behold in that building. On that particular visit, I was "behind the ropes" to do some maintenance work on a database server sitting in the corner of one of the center's conservation rooms. Sitting near me were a remarkable array of items, ranging from a model sailboat used in the making of an old John Huston film, to a collection of original Edgar Allen Poe manuscripts. And these were items that weren't even on display. I would've love to have just spent months rummaging around in that one room...

Sadly, much of the collection of the Harry Ransom Center is accessible on to scholars on a by-reservation basis. Fortunately, plans are in place to make the collects more accessible to the public.

Re:Should be seen in person (1)

spencerogden (49254) | about 12 years ago | (#3779050)

That is too bad, about the stuff not being availible. I've been there a couple times and it was OK. Oh well..

An Idea (2)

colmore (56499) | about 12 years ago | (#3778679)

The article states that they're trying to recreate the process by which the original picture was taken.

Once they've done that, they should figgure out where the window from which the picture was taken was and take a new (8 hour) exposure with the old technology, as a comparason.

Re:An Idea (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3779210)

colmore, you are a dumb ass. And you have the most pathetic sig ever.

Get a life, kid.

I wonder when the LAST photograph will be taken? (2)

dpbsmith (263124) | about 12 years ago | (#3778700)

...That is, the last photograph taken on film-as-we-know-it, by a photochemical process involving silver halides?

I know that won't be a very well-defined event, since undoubtedly researchers, historians, and dedicate hobbyists will periodically rediscover and revive it... there's never any point at which you can say "the last daguerrotype has been taken."

Let's put it this way. At the end, there will still be photo stores that carry film--but only specialty, boutique stores, and only in large cities, and the film they carry will be from the last manufacturer that will continue to make it for aficionados. Then that last manufacturer will pull the plug and you won't be able to make a "photo" unless you're prepared to make the emulsion and film yourself.

How long until that happens? My guess: fifteen years.

And on a related note: (1)

mparaz (31980) | about 12 years ago | (#3779111)

What was the first digital photograph taken?
Is it in some lab somewhere?

Is this fake? (2)

CProgrammer98 (240351) | about 12 years ago | (#3778762)

I think it's fake! Theer's no tourist [] in the picture!

It's funny, laugh!

Re:Is this fake? (2)

JCCyC (179760) | about 12 years ago | (#3779239)

There will be. Shortly. Bet on it.

Now I had a truly malevolent idea. What if someone hacks into that MSNBC article and puts the tourist-guy'ed version there? (mwahahaha!)

Why? (1)

FreeLinux (555387) | about 12 years ago | (#3778927)

"But the scientists have still to try to recreate that process."

Why? Is there some need for antiquated photo processing? While the photograph is of significant historical value, I can see no value in re-creating the process. We have no shortage of poor quality photographs today. Even todays poorest quality is FAR superior to this. Why would anyone waste research dollars trying to reproduce the process.

Re:Why? (1)

Binary Boy (2407) | about 12 years ago | (#3779261)

The value in recreating the process is for conservation and an understanding of the development of photography for historical reasons. Conservation efforts seek to understand the genesis of all works, whether paintings, sculptures, or photography, in order to understand the context of the work.

Taken in France by a Frenchman and its in... TEXAS (5, Interesting)

fruey (563914) | about 12 years ago | (#3778976)

I lived in the town of birth of Niecephore Niepce for a year. The photo was taken, I believe, in a nearby village. I find it incredible that this historic piece of French, and by extension European invention, is in America. Many others are too, no doubt. Some great Daguerrotypes are in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, for example. They are fascinating to look at, as they change a little based on your angle of viewing. Not quite like a holograph but a truly mind-bending experience. They are far more elegant IRL than looked at on a web page in 2D. The silver tones are fantastic compared to white and black photo paper or 72dpi greyscale.

In fact the town (Chalon sur Saone, in Burgundy) is a quiet place with very little tourism. Should that photo be there, however, perhaps it would be taken more often for what it is - the birthplace of modern photography. There is a little Museum there (The Niepce Museum [] ) which is fantastically interesting. Sadly its piece de resistance is in Texas.

Chalon sur Saone still has a big Kodak factory though. A lot of you who may have toured in Paris etc may have bought film manufactured there.

the Shroud of Turin is older (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#3778986)

One theory is that Leonardo Da Vinci created the Shroud of Turin using primitive photographic techniques that he discovered. In this theory, Jesus Christ as depicted on the Shroud is really Leonardo himself. Such a feat puts the earliest photograph back another 350 years or so...

Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorskii (2)

wirefarm (18470) | about 12 years ago | (#3779290)

Moments ago, I posted a story on my website [] to the Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorskii exhibit on I clicked submit and then jumped to Slashdot to check the headlines - Imagine my surprise when I see this link.
I feel like monkey #100 right now...

Jim in Tokyo
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account